googologywikiaorg-20200223-history
User talk:Cloudy176
action=edit&section=new}} Leave a message • action=history}} History • action=purge}} Purge this page Discussions older than 3 months may be archived. My timezone is UTC+9 hours. If you post a message here, make sure to check back this page later, as my reply will usually be on this page. Mutual "Friend" Hello Cloudy176, there is something I need to talk to you about. I know I have made no edits here, but we do have a mutual "friend". If possible, I'd like to meet you in chat at 8:00 PM, SAST. Cooljoe01 (Talk) (9 Mar 2019 8:37 AM SAST) 06:37, March 9, 2019 (UTC) :That would be 3:00 AM in my local time, though. Any other suggestions? -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 13:10, March 9, 2019 (UTC) ::Alright, tell me a time that will suit you (that still keeps my time zone in mind). Cooljoe01 (Talk) (9 Mar 2019 7:50 PM SAST) 17:50, March 9, 2019 (UTC) :::Ooh, you two are going to talk about a "friend"? I wish I could meet them... I love making new friends! :D MegaR0ck3r (talk) 01:41, March 10, 2019 (UTC) ::::I am free now for another 3-5 hours. Cooljoe01 (Talk) (10 Mar 2019 7:04 PM SAST) 17:04, March 10, 2019 (UTC) Not directly related to the above messages Hmm... -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:54, March 11, 2019 (UTC) Please stop reverting my contributions It looks like you have reverted my contributions on Exponentiation. I have reverted your contributions. If you keep reverting my contributions, you might be blocked from editing anymore. 22:31, April 4, 2019 (UTC) :I re-added \(n \neq -1\) because the equation \(\int x^n dx = \frac{1}{n + 1}x^{n + 1} + C\) doesn't hold if \(n = -1\), as \(\int x^{-1} dx = \int \frac{1}{x} dx = \ln x + C\). I would have re-added it again if it wasn't already re-added in a different form. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 08:00, April 5, 2019 (UTC) Google Docs as a source XYZeed (talk) 01:23, April 18, 2019 (UTC)Hey, I have a question. Can I cite my numbers using a Google doc that is open to the public? :We allow (or allowed?) Google Sites as a source, so why not Google Docs as well? They aren't that much different. However, if you allow editing of the doc by the public, it would count as an open wiki, and I don't think that will be a reliable enough source. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 14:35, April 18, 2019 (UTC) apology I apologize for vandalizing your userpage. DrCocktor (talk) 14:42, April 18, 2019 (UTC) :It's fine. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 15:10, April 18, 2019 (UTC) XYZeed (talk) 13:02, April 19, 2019 (UTC)Okay so I made a page for my number and added a source does that mean it won’t get deleted? :According to Sbiis Saibian, the only other reason a page will get deleted is if your number is ill-defined DrCocktor (talk) 18:56, May 8, 2019 (UTC) ::I don't think being ill-defined is a valid reason to delete an article. Oblivion is still around, for example. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 03:06, May 9, 2019 (UTC) 25 what did you add to the article about 25? Ribark (talk) 10:08, April 23, 2019 (UTC) :It's just . -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 14:32, April 23, 2019 (UTC) ::And now with Hyper operator? Ribark (talk) 15:16, April 29, 2019 (UTC) ::: . Nothing special. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 15:18, April 29, 2019 (UTC) ::::Oh Ribark (talk) 15:20, April 29, 2019 (UTC) Myriotar and Myrintar Who added the titles "Myriotar" and "Myriotar"? If you deleted the pages I made for them because they're not in their source, then who made them if it wasn't Denis Maksudov? Ribark (talk) 12:49, April 28, 2019 (UTC) :It's someone who frequently added unsourced numbers on the mainspace and templates on this wiki. I have removed that name from the template containing Denis Maksudov's numbers, but for some reason, the what links here for and still display links. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:38, April 28, 2019 (UTC) ::Huh Ribark (talk) 10:02, April 29, 2019 (UTC) ::I have an image with the two, showing that they're still around. Ribark (talk) 10:07, April 29, 2019 (UTC) Thanks for making me realise euro shouldn't be capitalized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ribark (talk • ) 15:25, May 1, 2019 (UTC) :No problem. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:50, May 1, 2019 (UTC) Admin privileges Make me an admin please DrCocktor (talk) 04:43, May 5, 2019 (UTC) :No, I don't think you're ready yet. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 03:06, May 9, 2019 (UTC) �� DrCocktor (talk) 21:56, May 9, 2019 (UTC) Gender So I’m confused by your profile. R u male or female DrCocktor (talk) 23:45, May 10, 2019 (UTC) :I made that part intentionally confusing. I'm actually male. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:05, May 11, 2019 (UTC) Undo Revision Why did you undo my revision on deedlit’s userpage DrCocktor (talk) 02:58, May 16, 2019 (UTC) :While Deedlit having reducing interest in googology might be true, he might not want to write messages like that on his user page. In general, you may want to avoid edits that significantly alter the meaning of other user pages. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 17:40, May 16, 2019 (UTC) GibsonC0104 Why did you block him a second time? He was creating his numbers as blog posts not articles DrCocktor (talk) 16:02, May 17, 2019 (UTC) :The user was unsourced pages on article space. I turned them into blog posts. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 16:12, May 17, 2019 (UTC) New Rule-Breakers Well, well, well. Look what was just made. https://googology.wikia.org/wiki/Googolongplex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ribark (talk • ) 15:33, May 24, 2019 (UTC) Link unavailable. Error 404 DrCocktor (talk) 01:00, May 25, 2019 (UTC) :Well, I moved the page off the mainspace, so the original link will no longer work. I should have replied sooner. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 09:25, May 25, 2019 (UTC) Wikis as sources to post your googologism Are we allowed to use the other wikis as sources DrCocktor (talk) 21:26, May 27, 2019 (UTC) : The rule on citation is available here. : p-adic 22:06, May 27, 2019 (UTC) Clarification of Problems Hi. Since this wiki is the largest wiki on googology, many beginners refer to it. Then they usually do not doubt that numbers or systems in articles are actually well-defined, while several stuffs contain theoretical problems. For example, BEAF is said not to be successfully defined beyond tetration level, while some believe that BEAF is stronger than that level. BIG FOOT is ill-defined, while many believe that it is a valid uncomputable number. The definitions of Little Bigeddon and Sasquatch contain undefined stuffs, while they are widely believed as the largest valid uncomputable numbers. I think that it is better for us to clarify the existence of such problems (mainly on ill-definedness) so that beginners hesitate to just believe the well-definedness of them without sufficient thoughts. What do you think abut it? If you agree with me, then I will add some descriptions on such problems. I would like you to give me your opinion. p-adic 05:25, May 28, 2019 (UTC) :Sure, if you want. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 14:09, May 28, 2019 (UTC) :: Thank you! :: p-adic 15:08, May 28, 2019 (UTC) Clarification of Problems, part 2 Hello, Cloudy176. I would like to ask you: which ordinal in FGH corresponds to Worm(3)? Indirect methods derive an estimate about \omega*3+1. Tetramur (talk) 15:01, May 28, 2019 (UTC) I just wanted to say thanks for sticking around and helping moderate the place. It can be kinda depressing to see others leave so finding people like you, Ynought, and others popping up in the comments really means a lot. Again, thank you. QuasarBooster (talk) 00:09, May 29, 2019 (UTC) :My determination keeps me going. -- ☁ I want more ⛅ 18:02, May 29, 2019 (UTC) Could you please block DrCocktor? Or at least, block him from editing my talk page. It seems like he's only there to troll or leave nonsensical comments. He first left two kind of stupid question, then left fart jokes, then left a sexual orientation joke (the latter two I deleted). Cookiefonster (talk) 19:36, June 9, 2019 (UTC)